(PoA review #2!)

[reenka]

I saw noblerot's great review and dear Maya's priceless take on things and well-- virtually everyone's review is... more of a review than I feel capable of. I'm too close to this movie, and my eye for detail and whatever analytical zeal I possess is overwhelmed by the sheer overwhelming emotion of seeing (especially huge, in IMAX).

The funny thing about movies is that soon enough, people come up with virtually every viable interpretation. I think it's 2 days later, and people have already pretty much said everything there is to say. Which I suppose says something, I'm not sure what, because the book itself could provide -months- of discussion material, I think.

In the end, I believe a review of a Harry Potter movie is pointless, because most viewers are fans, and thus won't be watching it in the same way they'd watch a "normal" movie. Everyone was -looking- for something in this movie, I think, and its success depends heavily on whether or not they found it. I was looking for Harry.

Well, he's there :D


Actually, I feel a bit guilty because there were certainly "interesting" points I could've thought of, like the details of Cuaron's style (the transitions, colors, camera angles, blah blah) and the specifics of some semi-minor characterizations I care little about in canon and so don't bother noticing (Pansy, that-boy-that-isn't-Crabbe, Dumbledore, Trelawney, etc). I actually really liked Trelawney because it's obvious that Emma Thompson knows how to act & the camp flowed well and easily. It's nice to see a real professional actor in an HP film-- you could just -smell- it somehow; like, Gary Oldman and Emma and Alan Rickman-- they're just in a class by themselves. It doesn't even matter what they're doing, it seems, because they can't help but do it well.

I mean, Gary was just sitting there, looking at Harry, at the end, and then he raised his hand and laid it on Harry's chest and said a hokey line about the dearly departed being in our hearts, and I was like OMG WAH SIRIUS, because he -was- Sirius by virtue of sheer presence on screen. His eyes glitter and his hands are long and gnarled-looking and mesmerizing and one looks at him and thinks, if I was Harry, I'd be melting in my shoes too. Heh. I could -tell- that what Sirius was saying (oh, you look just like your father, Harry) meant a zillion times more because -this man- was saying it. He just had this simple undiluted intensity that demanded Harry's most direct, child-like response.

I think my impression of Draco as silly and non-offensive (to the point where I wondered why Harry or anyone else would be bothering to care, like, ever), was lightened upon second viewing. Yeah, okay, he was silly many times, but he did seem to have a sort of duality, at least, where he reverted into silliness & over-the-top melodrama when the Trio paid attention to him, but he was all sneer-strut-sneer to his friends and behind their backs and such. I mean, it seemed like he was teasing, yeah, but I thought I saw glimpses of competitiveness & a sincere sense of resentment, though maybe I was just looking for that. I think in the movie, he was being kinda passive-aggressive, what with so much viciousness directed off Harry to Buckbeak.

It's hard to really describe since it was something about Tom Felton's exact expression or tone that made the difference. You must understand-- while I believe canon!Draco is camp, I also think he's actually very angry, too. That's like, one of the things he has in common with Harry, that unites them in my head-- the obsessive anger thing. So yeah. I counted the sneers, baby (though Harry only got angry once, before the first Buckbeak scene, I take what I can get).

My second viewing of Lupin (a problem area before) was more conflicted. It's like this characterization works & doesn't work at the same time. In my memory, I was going overboard, thinking that Harry seemed overly indulgent or bored by Lupin and that Thewlis gave him a weird sort of patronizing insensitivity; now, my only real issue is that I feel there ought to be some indefinable -more-, something you cannot claim is textual but is a sort of magical ingredient that would make this a magical, mesmerizing character, like Sirius was. Basically, while I think the characterization did the job, so to speak, I didn't find this person at all sympathetic, and I want to like Lupin (more).

In fact, I want to love Remus, and I couldn't, quite. Which isn't so much a review as a sort of pathetic wish-fulfillment thing, so. Though I couldn't see why -Harry- would be drawn to this person either... though I suppose in canon, he wasn't, not so much. Maybe he just seemed both reserved in the extreme and 'louder' than I expected; mostly, if you based it solely on the movie & the semi-unfortunate casting choice, his nature is muddled and his behavior nearly nonsensical, especially at the Shrieking Shack. Though like I said, it does the job except possibly Remus' interaction with Sirius. Thewlis is more than adequate for the Snape bits, but he had no discernable chemistry with anyone, Gary Oldman included, that's all. Possibly though, you could say he had chemistry with Snape, but it seems like Alan Rickman could have chemistry with a rock, if he drawled at it. :D

I keep trying to like, change (or acquire) my own opinion on movie!Hermione, however the fact remains that I don't care: she doesn't annoy me too much, it's all good. I kept staring at her, trying to feel something one way or the other this time, and mostly, I decided she's not perfect at all-- she's still snotty, bossy, a bit hysterical at times (remember when she cried in the first movie? well, this movie she's just irritated all the time) and also about as secretive as Dumbledore. Whom, by the way, I found less cute than the first one-- as in, he was also silly & doddering, but it seemed more more external than internal (which might be more canon, but I like less). I didn't feel Dumbledore's deep and abiding intelligence this movie (not that I particularly care, as I said).
~~


It's funny how I did notice the whole Marauders thing being up in the air the first time, but-- since I didn't know it wouldn't be explained by the end at the time, I just enjoyed the wink-wink-nudge-nudge aspect of the movie. In the end, it really is made for fans of the books (unlike say, the LoTR movies which do stand on their own, seeing as I haven't read the books & understood them pretty well, I think).

Cuaron brought visual expressiveness & flair and a sort of sense of surface emotional immediacy to the movie, so it all flowed together as you watched it. You get to see the parts you enjoy with about 30% (or more) of their meaning coming from you, the viewer. The actors don't depend on story/characterization logic to work well together (or not), 'cause the acting overall seems more natural & less stilted. So like, now, one could tell more minute differences-- i.e., some things work & some things don't. It's very much a character-development commentary of a movie in that way.

I get the feeling you're simply not expected to analyze it too deeply as far as canonicity & linear progression & so on, outside of -knowing- why certain scenes happen and how they really relate to these characters overall. It's not a movie that draws on the decisions of the other movies, really, so it's not quite a sequel but a sort of "arc" film in fanfic terms. It's referring to and shamelessly (if often accurately) interpreting a source text related to the texts that fueled the other films, but also independent of them. The movie is just -more- loosely linked in some ways than PoA is as a book, I guess, but you could probably get away with arguing that makes PoA a better movie. Even so, I'd respect it slightly more if it stood on its own like the LoTR movies do.

I think of it in terms of the 3rd movie excelling in "artistic expression" rather than "technical merit". The viewer is more a part of the intended process than normal (so I suppose that makes it squarely the movie equivalent of-- admittedly good-- fanfic), so certain things are just assumed, like-- most blatantly-- knowledge of Snape's precise relationship to Sirius & Remus, who the Marauders were and to a lesser extent, Harry's canon relationship with Remus and maybe even Draco (since Draco's past nastiness was sort of assumed).

I didn't care that Remus and Sirius were never "outed" as Messieurs Moony & Padfoot because it was obvious Snape knew (and obviously, so did Remus & Sirius themselves), so there was a lot of play on that anyway-- mostly in the Snape-teasing bits, like the message on the Marauder's Map and in the Shrieking Shack and such. Still, it's a questionable directing/editing choice, though individual level of fannish concern (and this is mostly of concern -to- fans of the book) will vary.

In the light of purely PoA-limited logic, if one chose to judge the film as a direct reflection of canon, Harry's blatant righteous anger and aggression also became questionable. (This was mollified upon second viewing and slight compensation for Dan's acting skills). Ideally, I think PoA Harry is more lost and questioning and worried, but Dan Radcliffe just has issues looking like that. When I felt more generous and squinted a bit, I could see how he was trying. He's supposed to lose control with Aunt Marge and leave in a fit of adolescent rebellion and -hurt- as much as anger, and I was reassured when I looked for that hurt-- it's just generously masked by said anger. This Harry's just... slightly more ambiguous and harder to read than I think of canon!Harry as being, that's all.

There were flashes of the 13 year-old insecurity and uncertainty there amidst the lovely rage and slight homicidal fervor (all these often centered around Sirius) especially if you looked for them, I think. When decisive action is required, this Harry seems completely confident, but any emotional interaction-type stuff really seems to boggle him, which is realistic. He really doesn't talk well to -anyone- this movie, being all awkward edges and inappropriate body-language, and that's kinda cute, actually. Heh. Ron's even more like that; it's funny how totally with the program Hermione is, though.

I do think canon!Harry is more passive-aggressive, but you've got to make allowances for the movie medium (which begs for action, action, action). I did love the smirky deadpan of him telling Aunt Marge they beat him at St. Brutus' all the time (classic Harry, heheh), the lost confusion with Stan at the Knight Bus, the exhilaration of flying & the believable sort of reticence he had with Buckbeak at first (which he seemed more genuinely frightened by than the Dementors-- or certainly Snape, ahahah).

Rupert's Ron & Tom's Draco were great-- pretty canon within their alotted screentime, I thought, but not as much canonical in their vibe with Dan's Harry. Harry & Draco had little to no mutual animosity to the point where I wondered if Harry just didn't -have- emotional ties to anyone outside of his few friends and his parents (and therefore Sirius as an extension of his parents). I mean, especially the super-cute love-note paper crane-- he blew that thing with such a darling pout that I really couldn't imagine why they -didn't- 'love each other, really'. Heh.

Hermione seems like a good side-kick & muddled love-interest most of the time, if only she didn't hysterically throw herself at Ron (and I'm not even mentioning the ridiculous decision to have 13 year-old British schoolboys-- i.e., Harry-- throwing themselves at her in turn). Her relationship-- that is, friendship-- with Ron seemed pretty there and canonish, what there was of it, so yeay. It's just, I suspect boy-boy friendship (that is, the Harry&Ron) was considered not "dramatically interesting" enough, not like the supposed tension & conflict with a girl (or say, a school rival) brings into a film. That said, you had the bit with the boys fooling around with the candy (way cool) & Ron waking up with Harry indulgently shushing him, which is more than we had before, isn't it?

It's like, it's not a friendship movie, I guess, and they had limited time and had to focus, focus, focus on what propelled the plot. And one has to admit Harry&Hermione's relationship propelled the plot a lot more than Harry&Ron's. Also, the shippy stuff was more in the way of newish ("preview" type) territory to explore, so I imagine that makes it more artistically interesting for a director.

So. Like I said, enjoyment depends on accepting the central performances (Harry, Ron, Draco, Sirius, Snape), filling in the blanks & suspending fannish disbelief.

Comments

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

I think the POV change from book to movie makes Harry less sympathetic - his nastier actions are usually explained if not justified by the reader knowing his feelings.
The last two films seemed to deal with this by making Harry nicer; whereas he seemed pettier in PoA, imho - stealing Neville's candy, shoving carol singers, the snow scene, the exploding at Marge after almost no provacation.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Hmm, that's interesting. It's really hard for me to see Harry in any incarnation as "unsympathetic". I mean, I love him to the point of insanity, and objectivity is a nice, fabled thing I don't possess, but :D Yeah, I see your point... however, his teenage poutiness wasn't even OoTP-level or anything... in fact, I dunno -who- (if not Harry) really seemed sympathetic in this movie, anyway. I mean, Ron was a whiny dork a lot of times & Hermione is so full of herself it's painful to watch, while Draco (okay, there's Draco)-- Draco's just kind of a meanie-slash-wannabe-clown or something. I mean, how could a character who -whimpers- and nearly cries at the smallest provocation be considered sympathetic? It all depends on whether you loved him to start with, especially considering this is a third movie.

A lot of times, I thought Frodo wasn't painted in the best of lights, for instance, but that wasn't really the point. The point is that it's his story & one's supposed to either identify with him or ignore him to kind of go along for the story's sake. Then again, I never entirely empathized with the whole... need for a beloved character to be sympathetic...? I guess...? Like, I could think someone's an immature asshole & still like them 'cause they're cute when they're angry. But then, I'm immature like that. :D

[malafede.livejournal.com]

I mean, how could a character who -whimpers- and nearly cries at the smallest provocation be considered sympathetic?

What? Of course he's sympathetic. Don't you whimper? Don't you cry? I mean, I know lots of people don't want to see this about themselves as humans, but that's actual humanity, there.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Ehehe, that's my whole thing about wussyness being unsympathetic to me personally, heh. I don't tend to whimper or cry, no. Not because I'm tough, I guess, but more because I... I dunno, repress things? Am weirdly stoic I think. Never thought I'd apply that word to myself, either ^^; But yes. That's why I don't necessarily like whiny losers-- I mean, go ahead, be a loser, just don't whine-- at least, most commonly I'd say people like losers who fight back rather than sit there and whimper.

In fact, in terms of book canon, I think that people like Draco (and by extension, the Slytherins) because generally they act out & mock & bully instead of whimpering or crying. In my mind, if Draco does whine he's kind of being melodramatic and silly rather than seriously going for pity. Remember me and my whole thing about pity :>

Anyway, in the movie he seemed to be genuinely whimpering & peeing in his pants & the sight of Hermione's wand, which I think is pretty OOC, but not sympathetic either. :>

[malafede.livejournal.com]

In fact, in terms of book canon, I think that people like Draco (and by extension, the Slytherins) because generally they act out & mock & bully instead of whimpering or crying. In my mind, if Draco does whine he's kind of being melodramatic and silly rather than seriously going for pity.

Oh, totally! Though sometimes he is weak and cowardly and vile and I do think that’s human. I mean, that’s what makes me emotional about them, as opposed to an intellectual outlook on their dynamics and his behavioural patterns and his morals and whatever. I mean, this is really me and you being different because ugliness is such an important part of humanity for me. If I don’t feel it, I immediately associate the character in question with super-humanity and dismiss it as a formula or a symbol or tool of the Man. :)

Anyway, in the movie he seemed to be genuinely whimpering & peeing in his pants & the sight of Hermione's wand, which I think is pretty OOC, but not sympathetic either. :>

Oh, I repressed that. You’re right. And Kloves must die.

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

No-one's really sympathetic in PoA. I mean, Harry gets the lionshare, as usual (in both books and movie, I mean), with Draco trailing behind (this is just my opinion, though.)
But really, everyone seems to be being an asshat.
Sirius and Lupin I have no sympathy for, and never have. Probably never will. Hermione's arrogant, Ron's petty...

I never entirely empathized with the whole... need for a beloved character to be sympathetic...?

Oh, totally. But I need a 'hero' to be sympathetic.
I had huge issues with Buffy and it's fandom, because the story requires the audience to see her as good, most of the time. And I thought she was a self-centred martyr complexing bitch, most of the time.
(I have much more sympathy for Harry, but the self-centredness and the self-pity are still his most irritating characteristics. I probably have this qualities in spades myself, though, so this could be a reaction against that.)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

But I need a 'hero' to be sympathetic.
Well, I think what it comes down to is, I find Harry sympathetic because I don't judge his emotional responses-- that's where I was going with the whole... "right" or "wrong" emotional response thing being hard for me to grasp. I find peoples sympathetic if I can put myself in their shoes-- if I can feel what they feel. And I can almost always feel what Harry feels-- possibly because I write him so much, and possibly because he's got all this rage and insecurity and neediness and pride (wahahahah).

I think malafede said it best when she said Harry's not a hero-- yet. I mean, he's on the -journey- to heroism & redemption & victory over Voldemort & the darkness within, blah-blah but the point is that it's a coming of age story, therefore he makes mistakes & acts like an asshat (which I actually find cute). As far as the "authorial voice" validating him-- well, that's what happens when you don't have a 3rd-person omniscient but rather a 3rd-person limited narrator :>

Right now, it's sort of something like, "he's not a hero, really, but he's in the right time at the wrong place & he follows his (better than average) instincts & generally his opponents are a lot worse & he does his best & it's sort of enough". Or something. Overall, one either loves him or not, but I think either way it's like-- he's a person, not a "hero". There are no Heroes, y'know, but some people are really cool. :>

[malafede.livejournal.com]

I mean, it seemed like he was teasing, yeah, but I thought I saw glimpses of competitiveness & a sincere sense of resentment, though maybe I was just looking for that. I think in the movie, he was being kinda passive-aggressive, what with so much viciousness directed off Harry to Buckbeak.

I think you're confusing him with harry with the passive-aggressiveness. This is said as a compliment, mind you. Harry becomes explicitally aggressive in OoP, in POA - and GOF for that matte - he's still at the emotional blackmail phase. I like that about him, it's so low. Though of course I can't expect Daniel Radcliffe to express that level of sophistication. I mean. He couldn't even fake anger, could he?

However my impression of Draco is that he was very obviously angry in which he was bitter and so onviously resented what he (... and I) perceived at unfair strikes of luck or sheer favouritism shown at Harry. I think after Harry's hippogryff flight it was very out there, he wasn't capable of hiding it at all, the rage and impotence and revenge thirst. He's like, Oh my fucking god, even the stupid chicken likes him! Is there no justice in this world at all??? I KEEL YOU BIOTCH.

I LOVED Gary. I liked how crazed and fatalistically flawed he played Sirius, with the passion and the smugness and the hookery and the frigging confusing Harry with James. I love that so much about Sirius. I don't want to hear people tell me it was the slash that gave Harry and Sirius such great chemistry, because that's so reductive, really. I feel the same about Harry and Draco, btw, and the UST was so obviously intentional with them.

Lupin: I feel there ought to be some indefinable -more-, something you cannot claim is textual but is a sort of magical ingredient that would make this a magical, mesmerizing character, like Sirius was

I think the problem is that, contrary to Sirius, Remus doesn't have that spark, it simply is part of his characterization that he is quiet, living more in his mind than in the connection with other characters, almost done fore in the sense that he always gave me the impression life had worn him, and that gives him a sort of cynism that he hides behind avery fake (to me) facade of niceness. I think I liked Thewlis's performance because it played on that dicotomy perfectly. It also gave Lupin that intentionally passive-aggressive, duplicituous, thoughtful strenght he had in the canon. IMHO YMMV etc. Sirius is a man of instinct - Remus quite simply is not.

My fingers are itching to type a long rant about Hermione, but I feel you don't want that t rain on your indulgence of her.

I liked Dumbledore - he was so obviously scheming and machiavellic under that cheerful facade. I liked his medieval looks.

Even so, I'd respect it slightly more if it stood on its own like the LoTR movies do.

Yep, that's what I was thinking too. I loved that Cuaron brought his own vision to the story - this felt much more like an adamptation, like derivative art - but the continuity felt a bit illogical at times.

The problem with Ron is that he doesn't exist solely in function of Harry and Hermione in the books, as I keep getting from the movie. Which really makes me pissed at Kloves who I feel just doesn't like humanity as much as he likes heroism. I absolutely hated the cover of 2nd dvd, with Hermione and Harry looking stoic and Ron looking like a clown. Ah well. Alas. I mean, it's the only important thing about Ron that he looks slashy with Harry? Because I may be biased since I don't like H/R but that's the last of my concerns. I feel hopeful for GOF because there's so much Ron there, it's such a central book for him, and he blossoms so much as a character; it'd be probably a lot harder to brush him apart for Kloves.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Re: Lupin... I feel Dahlia said (http://www.livejournal.com/users/dahlia_777/34001.html?style=mine#cutid1) it better than me: Lupin is a restrained character (on the surface), but here he came off as glib. That made their more emotional moments feel fake.

That's exactly it-- I feel in the book, he did make a real emotional connection with Harry (at least from Harry's pov), and here he's supposed to be, but isn't. I quite understand that he's not shiny like Sirius even in maddened form, but even so, this is -Harry- who's responding to him and thus he should be shinier, 'cause I think of the film as being from Harry's pov too, in a way. Does that make sense? :>

I definitely feel you have more insight into movie!Draco than I do (wahahahah) and yeah... I mean, I could see the righteous indignation on his part, though... he's just soooo grossly incompetent and ridiculous in execution of said intent that... it's hard to take him seriously unless you already do. But I suppose that's what happens when people bond with character :D You transfer your affections wherever they may lead :>

I really loved the feeling that Sirius "liked" Harry too much somehow, in whatever way. I think that ambiguity is very canon, at least in my head. Like a doddering grandfather-type figure who -feels-, but doesn't necessarily feel the "right thing" or in the right direction, exactly, yet... I mean, Harry's so needy, it doesn't matter. So that's just great.

Also, notice I said -movie- Draco is passive-aggressive, and I do think he didn't confront Harry directly most times (and in fact ran away), which makes for the passive, now doesn't it?

I think our slight disagreement over Dumbledore kinda exemplifies the difference between us-- I tend to like a heavier dose of true wisdom and kindness & I dunno, goodness in people, even if they're heavily designated as "kind and good" by the text. While I'm willing to see the dark side or whatever, and I freely admit to it, I like to wallow in the light, especially when it comes to people I -can- do that with. Realism isn't always as important to me as... I dunno... warmth, I guess :>

[malafede.livejournal.com]

Re: Lupin... I feel Dahlia said it better than me: Lupin is a restrained character (on the surface), but here he came off as glib. That made their more emotional moments feel fake.

I started answering this three times but you know what, I just can’t be objective about Lupin’s relation with Harry and Harry’s (presumed) bond with him. I think I am just bitter at the predominant image of the good teacher that Lupin has in fandom, which clearly conficts with my interpretation of him as scheming and emotionally distant and a control freak. Also, I just read this (http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/movies/bal-to.kloves04jun04,0,2181479.story?coll=bal-features-headlines). I think it’s self explaining.

But I suppose that's what happens when people bond with character :D You transfer your affections wherever they may lead :>

It’s very good that I bond with Draco so strongly and you bond with Harry. We should bring our pornathon on an epic level.

Also, notice I said -movie- Draco is passive-aggressive, and I do think he didn't confront Harry directly most times (and in fact ran away), which makes for the passive, now doesn't it?

? You know, I think we may be talking about different things because the way I see it, Draco is always upfront about his Harry hate. Which leads to the constant pestering.

I think our slight disagreement over Dumbledore kinda exemplifies the difference between us-- I tend to like a heavier dose of true wisdom and kindness & I dunno, goodness in people, even if they're heavily designated as "kind and good" by the text. While I'm willing to see the dark side or whatever, and I freely admit to it, I like to wallow in the light, especially when it comes to people I -can- do that with. Realism isn't always as important to me as... I dunno... warmth, I guess :>

:) We’re talking more about ourselves than HP characters now, aren’t we? Which is good. The warmness for me comes from the dark, I think, the feeling of seeing the dark and accepting it. Though this probably does involve light, at least from my part, or from the characters that I’d like accepted it in the text. (Avatar pride!)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I just realized that it's not that I don't bond with Draco, see.... Draco remains the first one I bonded with and the one I empathize with rather than adore from the outside (I mean, I'm in Harry's head, but he's much more separate from me than Draco is). Does that make sense? I'm actually thinking of making a post about this (projection, you called it, right?) but I fear I'd lose all my credibility (if I currently have any).

Thing is... to me, I have -my- Draco, while Harry's JKR's. Y'know? JKR defines Harry for me, while I define Draco out of a hodgepodge of personal issues & projection, interpretation of canon & also various fanfic-related inspirations. I can't really claim anything about Draco, because he's such an idiosyncratic character to me-- there's no "uber!Draco" that I love-- there's only individual Dracos I love-- mine & Maya's & Silvia's & Trin's & Cassie's & so on and so forth. I dunno. I feel weird being put into this Harry-fancying slot where Draco was my actual hook in the fandom before I ever fell in love with Harry while reading GoF. I mean, I loved him before, but reading JKR's rendition made him -real- to me in a way no fanfic ever has.

Draco, on the other hand, is totally different. While I read the books, he's totally not a real character to me-- he's a collection of often contradictory (sometimes appealing, sometimes annoying) traits that rarely resolve into a sense of a -person-. Then again, I don't get "personhood" from anyone but Ron, Snape, Sirius & Luna (maybe Lupin but not really, probably Dumbledore, the twins & most of the rest of the Weasleys), apart from Harry. The books are simply not characterized/styled in a way I can digest directly. Do you know what I mean? I really need to get into characters' heads pretty directly to feel "know" them, and with Draco I've only done that in fanfic. I really feel he could be almost -anyone- in canon in terms of how I perceive him, even though I do know all these traits & characteristics he shows. They just don't add up to "real person" in my head any more than Fudge or Dudley or Neville, say. I don't know these people. I don't know canon!Draco, not -while- I read canon. I just. Don't. So I can't really care, even though at the same time I worry about him because I feel like JKR's could mess with the choices & possibilities for -my- Draco (since I can't very well ignore canon facts). I dunno, it's weird.

I love Draco, and I love things -about- canon!Draco, but I don't actually love canon!Draco 'cause he doesn't exist to me. Canon!Hermione doesn't exist either, by the way. Snape & Luna exist 'cause I identify with them even knowing so little-- I can latch on to things like intellectualism coupled with obsession coupled with emotional distance (hello, projection). They're character types I will always "know". Sirius exists less, but we know enough details about his life (unlike with Draco) and temperament outside of his relationship with Harry (again, unlike with Draco) so that I can build a person in my head. Ron exists 'cause he's easy to picture, basically, and also he's fallible & passionate & silly (again, easy to identify with)-- and unlike Draco, he's canonically described that way.

I can't bring myself to make a post about this 'cause I think it's just -too- meta & insane somehow, but yes. I also project myself a whole lot upon Draco, but I don't pretend he's JKR's at this point, see? Even if people say I write him IC, I know this is just because I don't have enough patience to really develop him realistically like I want to. And I say "develop" 'cause canon!Draco is like... "step 1" for me, y'know? He's the beginning of a character I want to play around with to achieve maximum intensity. So he's not me either, but he's definitely... Other. He's like my rage & frustration & scheming petty Slytherin whiny side, as well as my obsesso crushing-maniac side, as well as generally being that-pretty-boy-that-looks-prettier-on-his-knees :D Wah. Issues :>

[malafede.livejournal.com]

I fear I'd lose all my credibility (if I currently have any). Oh, not at all! You should do it. One of the conclusions I have reached after years of discussing texts is that projection is inevitable, just some people are kinda deluded about not doing it.

most of the rest of the Weasleys

You get personhood from Bill and Charlie?

I can latch on to things like intellectualism

Snape's not really intellectual, he's someone who would like to be one. And. He's sociophatic enough to keep his wits on him when other people's circumstances are in peril.

Luna isn't intellectual either, I think. She just has a fervid immagination.

He's like my rage & frustration & scheming petty Slytherin whiny side, as well as my obsesso crushing-maniac side, as well as generally being that-pretty-boy-that-looks-prettier-on-his-knees

ahaha, ain't that canon? :D :D :D

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Heheh yeah, I totally went overboard with the Weasleys-- I was just thinking Percy & Arthur & the twins. Mostly just the twins, actually-- I dunno, I can't -write- them, but they're so simple it'd be hard to go wrong with them :> Plus I love them, heheh.
I wasn't trying to focus on Snape or Luna's intellectualism as an... I dunno... lifestyle, just sort of that they hide within their minds, or overuse their minds, or use their minds for escape. I sort of grok that on some basic level. Like, they let their interests use them instead of them using their interests-- like Hermione does, which is why I don't identify with her. She's so outward-looking. My one semi-decent Hermione-fic, `Thirst', was about Hermione going obsesso & having her zeal for knowledge turn her away from the world. *sigh* Me & my issues writing Hermione :/

Yeah, that's funny, isn't it? The basic, instinctual things I latched on to from reading a few H/D fanfics to project upon Draco (before I'd ever read canon, mind you!!) actually turned out to be canonish.
I always find that funny :D :D

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't judge anyone by their worst sides, I think, y'know? Like, any halfway decent character has their good side and their nasty side; has people they're great to and people they're awful to, etc etc. Lupin in particular is a hard character to get a complete handle on, but I think it's unlikely he really is a complete asshat. If anything, he's Sirius' & James' friend, and while they're kinda jerks, they're also kinda y'know, good-hearted & passionate about their beliefs & great friends to each other. Sure, you could say Lupin gets too much credit or whatever, but the public is stupid & fickle, so it's best to ignore other people, I find, when judging others. It all gets so confusing, anyway. :>

I'd be the last person to claim I have any great insight into Lupin, but I still think he's not supposed to be sinister. Then again, this is a basic slant issue-- while I accept nastiness, I favor the kindness because that's just... I dunno... more fun to think about...? And anyway, I think it's only realistic to say he's supposed to be believable as Harry's support/confidante/adult anchor in PoA or whatever. Sort of like I have to show Draco depending on & appreciating Lucius believably somehow even as I know & try to show that Lucius is actually this huge asshat I would stomp on the entrails of if I could :>

Mostly, I wouldn't even care except everyone's like, "WHEE, LUCIUS" and I think I get a similar case of rampant contrariness, actually, it's just that I don't get contrary about characters I feel show much signs of being decent human beings (which Lucius doesn't at -all-). I mean, I'm sure he deserves love, but he's such a gibbering dodo it's hard to care. Lupin, on the other hand, has potential-- he's subtler & more truly intelligent from all appearances, more interestingly conflicted as well as y'know, he gets brownie points for not being on the side of say, ULTIMATE EVIL (that always turns me off, I DON'T KNOW WHY).

Movie!Draco was totally not upfront about the Harry hate. Do you really think so? I could barely discern any hate at all, first viewing. The boy sent him LOVE NOTES and strutted and pouted and. OMG, he had FUCK ME NOW, BAD BOY written all over him. Should I blame Rowling, Tom, Alfonso, or Kloves?? Ahahahah.

Also:
"I've never been an exposition guy,"
cracked me up :> :> explains so much!!
&

With Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Kloves has rid himself of the first two films' creature genealogies and dental records.
...
yeah -.-

[malafede.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't judge anyone by their worst sides, I think, y'know?

Oh, I wasn't judging him at all. I was just trying to explain him - also, emotional distance and a scheming mind aren't faults, are they? :) They're just psychological attitudes. If I had to pick up the worst side of Lupin, I'd say he's a coward.

I think it's only realistic to say he's supposed to be believable as Harry's support/confidante/adult anchor in PoA or whatever.

I just object to the notion of him as Harry's family, because he isn't. Like in NA. I effing hated it in NA when Lupin started making claims on Harry. Sirius is Harry's family. Lupin is just a guy who knew his dad.

Movie!Draco was totally not upfront about the Harry hate. Do you really think so?

Oh boy, yes. How do you explain his reaction to the Hippogryff? It's like Snape - he so tries to look in control, then gets incensed and starts emoting like crazy and makes a fool of himself.

Also:
"I've never been an exposition guy,"
cracked me up :> :> explains so much!!

Somebody should tell this guy that "explanation" isn't the same as "exposition".

But whatever, I have bigger problems with his handling of characters, as exemplified by quotes like this:

Kloves says that when he first met Rowling, he told her he intuited that Lily "was quite special" and that James "was complicated." And in the bridge scene, Lupin "illuminates Harry about his mother - the most wonderful thing about her was that she was understanding toward Lupin at a time few were. She saw something special about him when others, including himself, couldn't."

*PROJECTILE VOMITS*

I am totally hating Lily thanks to him now. She's in the same category with Neville and Molly Weasley. Meta hate rules.

Kloves admits, "I think he was in love with her in many ways."

*clutches head* The... total... banality... is ... raping... my... mind.

No, seriously, what the hell is with people's addiction to romance? I thought it was just women for cultural reasons, but apparently it isn't.

Kloves' sensitivity to the emotional reverberations beneath wild adventures is what makes him an ideal screen interpreter for Rowling.

Sensitivity how? he couldn't be more clichèed if he tried. honestly if I wrote a fanfic with that content fandom would mock me into indignity. or maybe it's just me that would laugh people into indignity for using love triangles as plot devices.

I want to start a community for girls who aren't into romance. Or are into other things besides romance.

like... [Bad username or site: lovedoesntmaketheworldgoround @ livejournal.com]...?

or more appropriately [Bad username or site: romanticlovedoesntmaketheworldgoround @ livejournal.com].

[malafede.livejournal.com]

bleargh. the first one was "lovedoesntmaketheworldgoround". and the second was "romanticlovedoesntmaketheworldgoround".

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

In a way, it's ironic, 'cause the one thing I've always, always been in tune with about Draco (before I felt I really knew him, even) was his rage. I mean, it never made me unsympathetic to Harry, because I always kind of knew that this was a hopeless, ridiculous thing in itself 'cause it was only a cover, a misplaced impotent sort of frustration that covered up his insecurity and hurt and longing. He raged because he -wanted- and what he wanted was attention and love and power, in some sort of jumbled order. Rage and craving propel Draco for me, and his sort of fatal lack of vision and a sense of insecurity & misplaced loyalties are what stop him from finding any kind of real success, I feel.

In the movie, however, the rage I felt was Harry's-- I mean, there was a lot of it, y'know? He growled and blew things up and pushed people and was a great big prat (which rage tends to make you into). Rage making you into a muttering clown just doesn't work in my head directly. I mean, certainly Draco showed signs of somewhat transparent arrogance and competitiveness, but -rage-? That's a much more emotional, personal thing that has little to do with posturing or strutting. It's more -intense-. It's just. Not a joke at all.

You could -infer- Draco's rage, you could assume it's there if you want, but... I couldn't really say it -was- put there on purpose. I mean, he was emoting like crazy, yes, but... the emotions felt fake and overdone, like he was just a hysterical little drama queen that can't stand the attention being on Potter for one more instant. That's more a peckish sort of temper than -rage-. He's like a yipping, bouncing little dog in the movie, while Hermione's one of those birds that peck you -hard- with the great big beak & Sirius is some (to be obvious) rabid dog and Harry... Harry's the wounded lion. But then, I'm partial :>

You're right, I mean... Lupin -is- just a guy who knew his dad. I just felt he should've had more of a sincere kindness to him since that would've been the only thing that explained Harry's being drawn to him, at least in the movie. Well, and all the bleh Remus-was-so-close-to-Harry's-mother stuff they put in :/

Yeah, people are kinda addicted to ze romance, aren't they? You see it in other ways besides the Remus/Lily thing-- I mean, all the ridiculous ships are just signs of this rampant kind of behavior. That's partly why Harry/Hermione pisses me the hell off, man :> Well, besides the fact that it shortchanges Ron's worthiness. *shakes fist at sky*

Heheheh, methinks Mr. Kloves was engaging in some projection of his own, there ^^;; *coughs*

[sarahtales.livejournal.com]

*smiles at wanton flattery*
Yes I am a champion reviewer. Dude. I have a Keen Eye. and also, my impartial judgement is second to none.
Specially when it comes to that Draco kid. I should be in the High Courts. yes indeedy.
which is to say I liked your review. I have also noticed upon second viewing that where I went wrong is in trying to love Lupin at all, which as you say cannot be done.
One enjoys oneself much more making cracks about inappropriate student/teacher relations.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Heheh, well, y'know how it is, objectivity is overrated and generally counterproductive to amusement value anyway. I certainly claim none, because everyone knows that the movie was really about how wee & adorable Harry was :D :D *coughs*

Heheh, yeah, next time I see it, it should be with an eye for a Harry/Remus/Sirius/Snape...er... foursome :D
Maybe Draco could watch....? :>